They may hit 11's just but simply will not hit 10's theres no way they will do it, try putting a wrc cars specs into a performance calculator eg 330bhp and 1230kg, and its 330bhp as although they they say there limited to around 300 clever people have worked out from the torque figures that they are actually around the 330bhp mark but even the torque isn't as large as people think as its normally quoted in nm and not ftlb which actually means they've got alittle over 400ftlbs which isn't really alot in the greater scheme of things.skiddusmarkus said:
As the weasel has pointed out big torque doesn't make a fast car, it makes a drivable car, if it was really torque that made them fast the likes of Honda's and any other powerful na car just wouldn't be quick.
The fastest race/rally car I remember being tested was Pat Dorans 700bhp+ rallycross rs200 and that did a mid 10 1/4 @ 140mph ish and they don't get much faster than that, also remember that group b cars were banned for being to fast and they around the 500-600bhp mark then but todays rally drivers always moan about how slow the wrc spec cars are compared to the group B of old.
Plus (i'm rambling now :lol: ) have you ever seen how long it takes a wrc car to get to its top speed of 130mph ish? I have from the on board footage and was shocked just how long it took them, you could almost see the drivers getting bored as they waited for it to get upto full speed on the longer straights :lol:
Edited to add that the wrc car minimum weight is 1230kg and not 1300kg as I thought doh :lol:
Last edited:
P
pulsarboby
Guest
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: fcuk me! didnt know i was on a mathamatics site:shock:
gotta laugh at you's lot with your mathematical equasions and so forth!
who in the real world really gives a toss, 99% of it comes down to driver ability and thats the FACT!
whats the point in saying ive got x amount of bhp over x amount of torque = my cars faster than yours:nerner: when in the cold light of day it comes down to can you use all that power to the max on the road? i think not! and on the track cars with far less power but in the hands of a good driver, which is a well setup balanced car, will whoop your hide over 2 or 3 laps.
i just dont understand this need to get an extra 20bhp and 15ib torque, or perhaps its me being the idiot:der:
this topic has decided something for me! i will now stick with a standard tubby, as i for one was being suckered into this bhp crap, which is wasted money when theres pleny enough power at 350bhp!
gotta laugh at you's lot with your mathematical equasions and so forth!
who in the real world really gives a toss, 99% of it comes down to driver ability and thats the FACT!
whats the point in saying ive got x amount of bhp over x amount of torque = my cars faster than yours:nerner: when in the cold light of day it comes down to can you use all that power to the max on the road? i think not! and on the track cars with far less power but in the hands of a good driver, which is a well setup balanced car, will whoop your hide over 2 or 3 laps.
i just dont understand this need to get an extra 20bhp and 15ib torque, or perhaps its me being the idiot:der:
this topic has decided something for me! i will now stick with a standard tubby, as i for one was being suckered into this bhp crap, which is wasted money when theres pleny enough power at 350bhp!
Last edited by a moderator:
Fusion Ed
Active Member
Fair enough!! Surely to understand what makes your car move it helps to know how one thing may relate to another?
Laughing at equations and so forth is all very well but they tell you how things will go if you can read them properly. Driver skilled or not, the physics are always there, but if you got the skills AS WELL as the physics you can do even more whooping.
Laughing at equations and so forth is all very well but they tell you how things will go if you can read them properly. Driver skilled or not, the physics are always there, but if you got the skills AS WELL as the physics you can do even more whooping.
Last edited:
skiddusmarkus
Active Member
If they were doing 12 sec 1/4's then they'd be hitting 110mph or so at the finish.As they accelerate 0-60mph in about 3 seconds,I find it pretty unlikely that it would take andother 9-9.5 secs to accelerate another 50mph,especially as these cars are built for blasting out of hairpin off camber bends up a hill on loose surfaces.
Besides they have people specifying and building gearboxes for specific events so ratios wouldn't even be an issue as they prob got about 20 gearboxes in the service van they can lob on in 10 minutes
.
Besides they have people specifying and building gearboxes for specific events so ratios wouldn't even be an issue as they prob got about 20 gearboxes in the service van they can lob on in 10 minutes
.
Micra Ed said:
I'd like to see how some of these 400+bhp 290ish torque Gtirs go down the 1/4. That's quite low torque in my books and can easily be matched by something running low 300s. That would prove the theory.;-)
The 300bhp Gtir should win if it has more torque. (I bet it doesn't)
(F1 cars have low torque, but a high(ish) torque to weight ratio)
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mhorsepower.html this is a interesting write up, it backs up all thats been said about torque............ right till the very last paragraph ;-) which basically says more power at higher revs is faster than more torque at lower revs, especially if you have 20 gearsets to chose from :tongue1:
Last edited:
Do you remember when you ran 12.3 in Rob's car? now do you also remember the estimated 0-60 time from the meter thing you had fitted at the time? I believe it was around a 3.6 sec time which would be about right on a drag strip, now I also believe the terminal speed was 110mph....... you can see where i'm going with this can't you :lol:skiddusmarkus said:If they were doing 12 sec 1/4's then they'd be hitting 110mph or so at the finish.As they accelerate 0-60mph in about 3 seconds,I find it pretty unlikely that it would take andother 9-9.5 secs to accelerate another 50mph,especially as these cars are built for blasting out of hairpin off camber bends up a hill on loose surfaces.
Besides they have people specifying and building gearboxes for specific events so ratios wouldn't even be an issue as they prob got about 20 gearboxes in the service van they can lob on in 10 minutes
So bearing in mind that Rob's car and the wrc car have a very similar power to weight ratio, does this not prove that it could indeed take another 9 or so seconds? I'm sure the gear change on the wrc car will be much quicker but then it also needs to make a extra gearchange in that distance.
Also heres the results from the performance calculator for a wrc car
Power at Flywheel (BHP) : 330
Weight without Driver (KG) : 1230
Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 272.60
0 - 60 (Secs) : 3.85
0 - 100 (Secs) : 10.08
60 - 100 (Secs) : 6.23
Quarter Mile (Secs) : 12.52
Terminal Speed (MPH) : 111.44
Drag Strip Quarter Mile (Secs) : 12.12
Drag Strip Terminal Speed (MPH) : 115.21
Strangley similar to what the wrc car actually did at Santa pod isn't it ;-)
Edited to add..... isn't it nice to have half sensible discussions on here for a change
Last edited:
Maths/physics give the answer to everything on this planet Bob, im sure some of us with more than a single braincell could come up with an equation for lap times with named driver in 2 cars of the same model with different power figures to see what will be quicker :lol:pulsarboby said:
driver abilty has nothing to do with how or why an engine/turbo does what it does.
Ed, i feel like our brief internet relationship has moved to a new level as im going to agree with you again :lol:Micra Ed said:
put a good driver in a fast car on a circuit, he will do a good lap time. put the same driver in a faster car and he will go quicker, even someone as simple as Bob should be able to understand that :lol:
if the 400bhp car is putting out those 290ish lbft of torque at 8000rpm it will be alot quicker over the 1/4mile than a 300bhp, 290lbft torque mong spec car revving to 6500Fast Guy said:
Last edited:
O
Odin
Guest
Just wait for max power kid to put you all right any minute now......
Your all not worthy
Rob
Your all not worthy
Rob
a post from another forum in regards to the subject matter now being discussed by my 'know it all self' all presented in simplistic terms so the masses on that site would understand :
the good old horsepower v's torque debate.
in the real world torque wins everytime for drivabillity , especially when its available early in the rpm range and is over a nice broad rev band.
it means quicker acceleration, easier overtaking, less down changes, etc.etc just plant your foot on the accelerator and go.
you can work out an engines therotical torque figure doing the equation
engine torque= horsepower X 5252/rpm
Engine torque is not what you feel on the road, what you feel on the road is the effect of gearing, drag and friction loss (tyres against the road) on the engines torque.
horsepower is an invented term used to measure an engines ability to work, and is not something you can feel. All the time the engine is working you are feeing the torque. Horsepower is used as a description as it goes back to the days of steam engines and having something to compare them to.
torque is what gets your vehicle moving. Horsepower is what keeps it moving and this is where it gets confusing again
Some of us aren't interested in the real world , we want a car thats going to be as fast as possible
being a 2 litre we need revs to flow lots of air, honda went with vtec and high rev limits nissan decided to use a turbo which is where it all goes wrong in the real world of drivabillity when aiming for a very fast car.
To get shit loads of air into the engine to make up for the lack of displacement we have to use a big turbo to keep the engine doing what it does. A smallish turbo like the t28 spools pretty quick, with an early peak of torque that can be kept pretty level there after for a rev band that makes the car very good to drive but the compressor wheel is to small to flow lots and lots of air which you all know is needed to burn bigger amounts of fuel to make the engine work harder, if you keep increasing the revs of the engine and begin to flow lots of exaust gasses, the turbo will eventually stop flowing air efficiently as its out its range and it will begin to do nothing but generate heat. To get round that you need to use a bigger turbo, a bigger turbo spools slower , so realworld drivabillity suffers (lag) but when it gets going it flows lots of air, which creates lots of exhaust gas when the fuel is burnt, which keeps it spooling and so it goes on. By compressing more air through the turbo, which is then pumped into the engine and mixed with larger amounts of fuel we have increasd the engines ability to work , so we have increased the horsepower...phew
as we're only worried about being able to flow the maximum amount of air to mix with large amounts of fuel we're only interested in what the car does at wot (wide open throttle) at high revs
so by having more horsepower we'll have more torque further up the revs
hyothetically speaking.......... as theres other factors to add to all of this to do it properly.
but
if for example i had 700bhp and could rev to 9000 using the equation i've put up....
700x5252/9000 i'd get 408lbft.
if i only had 300bhp
300x5252/9000 i'd get 175lbft.
We know that more torque means the car accelerates faster so my 700bhp car is accelerating quicker at 9000rpm than my 300bhp car, understanding how turbos work, what ever rpm range you pick where the turbo is working at its most efficient you will see more torque, on a big turbo that may not be until 5000rpm or above which most people wont want to suffer.
so to conclude, as i've made my head hurt trying to put it all this as simply as possible whilst being pestered constantly on msn and the phone, torque wins, but its where you want to have that torque that decides whether you go chasing big horsies.
For a daily driven, quick down the twisties or round a circuit car you want as much torque as early as possible for as long as you can realistically get it within your rev range.
for going very fast, which normally means you will be going in straight line you need to make your peak torque as far up the rev range as possible.
if you disagree or have anything to add please do so in an adult manner or i'll bring out the WMD's :lol:
the good old horsepower v's torque debate.
in the real world torque wins everytime for drivabillity , especially when its available early in the rpm range and is over a nice broad rev band.
it means quicker acceleration, easier overtaking, less down changes, etc.etc just plant your foot on the accelerator and go.
you can work out an engines therotical torque figure doing the equation
engine torque= horsepower X 5252/rpm
Engine torque is not what you feel on the road, what you feel on the road is the effect of gearing, drag and friction loss (tyres against the road) on the engines torque.
horsepower is an invented term used to measure an engines ability to work, and is not something you can feel. All the time the engine is working you are feeing the torque. Horsepower is used as a description as it goes back to the days of steam engines and having something to compare them to.
torque is what gets your vehicle moving. Horsepower is what keeps it moving and this is where it gets confusing again
Some of us aren't interested in the real world , we want a car thats going to be as fast as possible
being a 2 litre we need revs to flow lots of air, honda went with vtec and high rev limits nissan decided to use a turbo which is where it all goes wrong in the real world of drivabillity when aiming for a very fast car.
To get shit loads of air into the engine to make up for the lack of displacement we have to use a big turbo to keep the engine doing what it does. A smallish turbo like the t28 spools pretty quick, with an early peak of torque that can be kept pretty level there after for a rev band that makes the car very good to drive but the compressor wheel is to small to flow lots and lots of air which you all know is needed to burn bigger amounts of fuel to make the engine work harder, if you keep increasing the revs of the engine and begin to flow lots of exaust gasses, the turbo will eventually stop flowing air efficiently as its out its range and it will begin to do nothing but generate heat. To get round that you need to use a bigger turbo, a bigger turbo spools slower , so realworld drivabillity suffers (lag) but when it gets going it flows lots of air, which creates lots of exhaust gas when the fuel is burnt, which keeps it spooling and so it goes on. By compressing more air through the turbo, which is then pumped into the engine and mixed with larger amounts of fuel we have increasd the engines ability to work , so we have increased the horsepower...phew
as we're only worried about being able to flow the maximum amount of air to mix with large amounts of fuel we're only interested in what the car does at wot (wide open throttle) at high revs
so by having more horsepower we'll have more torque further up the revs
hyothetically speaking.......... as theres other factors to add to all of this to do it properly.
but
if for example i had 700bhp and could rev to 9000 using the equation i've put up....
700x5252/9000 i'd get 408lbft.
if i only had 300bhp
300x5252/9000 i'd get 175lbft.
We know that more torque means the car accelerates faster so my 700bhp car is accelerating quicker at 9000rpm than my 300bhp car, understanding how turbos work, what ever rpm range you pick where the turbo is working at its most efficient you will see more torque, on a big turbo that may not be until 5000rpm or above which most people wont want to suffer.
so to conclude, as i've made my head hurt trying to put it all this as simply as possible whilst being pestered constantly on msn and the phone, torque wins, but its where you want to have that torque that decides whether you go chasing big horsies.
For a daily driven, quick down the twisties or round a circuit car you want as much torque as early as possible for as long as you can realistically get it within your rev range.
for going very fast, which normally means you will be going in straight line you need to make your peak torque as far up the rev range as possible.
if you disagree or have anything to add please do so in an adult manner or i'll bring out the WMD's :lol:
Last edited:
and then straight into another hairpin off camber bend up a hill on a loose surface 8)skiddusmarkus said:
they dont need to go very fast in a straight line, they need to go reasonably fast (read as stupidly quick given the terrain) all of the time with as much throttle response as possible.
Last edited: